PrimeNumber

I'm curious as to what you view as the most credible news organization in Canada?

http://globalnews.ca/news/1436636/oilsands-cause-food-contamination-and-higher-cancer-rates-report/ We definitively know Fort Chipewyan has had Cancers related to Oilsands polllution. Only a matter of time before the truth "definitively" comes out about the Edmonton as well so OT can finally be satisfied.

Fort Sask is not too far away. Where are you drawing this imaginary border at??

Woooooooooow, must I do all the work. I'm pretty sure it says Air up in that 2nd paragraph. Just because the scientists that reported this study "did not definitively link the two" deosn't mean that they aren't linked. Come on OT, it's called common sense, use it. If people around the world are getting rare cancers from their air pollution, and people in Edmonton are getting the same rare cancers "not definitively linked" to air pollution. It's pretty obvious what is happening here. If you can't put two and two together than I really truly and deeply feel bad for you. And please never attempt to become a detective.

Protect the water up near Canada and destroy the water in the American South, I like it. Obama's actually a Canadian spy.

You can be against a religion without wanting to kill it's followers. I for one am anti-abrahamic religions. That does not mean I want people following those religions to die. I want to convert them, help them see the light of logic. If they do not denounce their religion, so be it that is their right. But I am still against it all the same. People use anti-semetism as a shield to keep Judaism from being criticized when in fact anti-semeitism has an entirely different meaning, it's sad really. But much like those followers of Islam in Saskatoon who recently said Islam cannot be criticized, they are all wrong. All religions should be criticized every single waking second of every single day until the very last follower of those religions stops following them. But when that criticism turns into to prejudice or hatred against that religion, that is where the problem arises. There is a difference between free speech and hate speech, please for the love of no god recognize it.

If you get rid of CBC there will just be a different channel broadcasting reruns of Road to Avonlea. You cannot kill that which is already dead.

Bud, obviously you did not read aaaannnnything. The first post, which is not huffpost at all?? http://www.ernstversusencana.ca/air-pollution-and-cancer-spikes-linked-in-alberta Not sure what link you clicked but I don't see huffpost in that link, though they are mentioned in the article. Are you referring to this link within the article??? I don't understand what you're getting at here. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/10/23/edmonton-air-carcinogens-levels_n_4150670.html And if you actually read the 3rd article you would find that it indeed does have information about air quality tests of course you probably just passed that link of as self serving as well. I don't see what your trying to refute here because it's pretty well documented both in this country and around the world that pollution causes cancers. I'd try to use a news source a partisan right winger would consider not "self-serving" such as Sun News but the article they published about Air Pollution due to fossil fuels being the leading cause of Cancer world wide found on this page : http://www.torontosun.com/topic/cancer published on April 17, 2013 seems to have magically disappeared. Could that be because Sun removed it for some self-serving purpose? That's okay though because with a simple google search you can find other articles about the same WHO study posted allll around the internet from webmd to reuters and pretty much all other major news sources across the internet and the world. So now that I have proven my point, with numerous links you can kindly move on. Thanks.

Well I know this for sure because of a co-worker that I worked with in a man camp in Northern Alberta who had at the time just found out he had Cancer which his doctors had linked to air quality and no he was not a smoker. I have not since kept in touch with him so I am not sure how his cancer is doing now. But doing a simple google search... Here One from a legal battle regarding Air Quality being linked to Cancer in the Edmonton Area Here is another from The Tyee about the oil Sands and Northern Alberta areas air being linked to cases of rare cancers Here is another from The Scientific American mostly about water contamination but it also has some information about Air Quality in Edmonton Area as well. It's not just the heavy industry but the culture of oil in the city. Working up there I can honestly say there are faaaaaaarrrrr more large trucks and SUV's than there are smaller fuel efficient cars.As well as a lot of trucking. I guess it depends where you draw the line for the "Edmonton area" as their are numerous coal fire plants West of Edmonton in the Duff area and winds can easily blow some of that East to Etown as well as a few smaller Natural Gas plants in Fort Sask. Even U of A has their own Natural Gas plant. All of this leads to bad air quality which has been proven to have a negative effect on the human body.

What would be interesting to see is how places like Edmonton and Calgary stack up per capita to places like Hong Kong and Port Au Prince because it's obvious there's a bit of a population gap. Although I know for a fact many cancer cases have been linked to air quality in Edmonton.

Doesn't air pollution from fossil fuels like oil have the opposite effect on the lifespan of a human? Just ask the 350,000 to 500,000 people that die prematurely every year from air pollution in China, dubbed the airpocolypse. Or you can ask the upwards of 7 million people that die prematurely world wide every year from air pollution, which from some estimates amounts to 1 in every 8 deaths, which would put it at a higher rate than deaths from tobacco. Then come back and tell me that has nothing to do with fossil fuels. Oh wait you can't, they're dead! It's to bad you don't have any real evidence to support your "argument". Or are you going to say that is just in everyone's "imagination".

The worst part is that there is still a large percent of the population of this country that still has no idea, including the current political party in charge and their leader...

What is even worth investing in over there? The opium trade? Rugs? We should have never gone in there. Not worth it. Waste of our countries military, time, money and resources. I don't even know why people would want to live there. Aside from some picturesque landscapes and manpower it has nothing to offer.

It might be in Harper's best interest to call an early election. I'd wager he's already losing any ground he's gained on the liberals. What should be a sure vote from Veterans is now in question and with his family tax promises now looking like a failure I think he is pretty much done. An impressive run but I think the fat lady is screaming at this point.

Yeah I can't see it ever working in developing nations at this point, the systems we have in place will not be replaced any time soon. The systems we use in developed nations may not be available in some developing nations for many, many years as well so for countries without a sewage system in place this is the best answer. Many of those nations also suffer from a lack of clean drinking water so it's kinda like getting two birds stoned at once, so to speak. The hard part is that many of these nations do not collect waste water in sanitary sewers let alone treat that waste in treatment plants which means there is no sewage sludge to feed into the processors. This technology coupled with new research in toilets, pumps and treatment systems that are affordable for the poor, and appropriate for smaller towns that cannot afford the more complex systems in developed nations will lead to new and possibly better systems to be developed in these areas then the ones we currently have. In due time and with a bit of luck some cities and towns in developing nations may be using better systems then the ones we have in place.

Apparently the owners of the Processor would be paid to take waste from wherever it is piling up, then process it and return whatever electricity it generates that is not used in the process back to the grid, where they will again be paid for it. How this works I am not 100% sure, I imagine a partnership between the Local Governments and whomever owns the Processors would have to be in place. As to question number 2, the answer is simple. Drink the crap down by the river with all sorts of diseases or drink this. It's not meant for developed nations, it's meant for developing nations. I guess the beggars can't be choosers statement would apply.

The Janicki Omniprocessor presented in the video above by Bill Gates, who's Gates foundation is one of the many groups funding the project, could be the answer to Clean drinking water and small amounts of renewable energy in third world countries. The Processor takes Human Waste and converts it into Clean Drinking Water, Energy to power the very process and even some to spare to go back into the grid and an ash byproduct. 92.3 cubic meters of human sewage can be converted into 86,000 liters of clean drinking water as well as a maximum of 300 kW of energy per day from a single processor. With a ground foot print of 230 sq. meters. With enough funding, this could really be a game changer around the world.

And obviously for the better. One day the Doug will fly.

To the right if you don't agree with them then you must be a Liberal supporter. They can't perceive the fact that you can disagree with all parties involved. All I know is at the time I said it's a bad idea to go wasting time, money and resources on anything to do with the middle east. Five years ago I was saying it's a bad idea, today I'm saying its a bad idea and 30 years from now I will continue to say it is a bad idea. Because as history has proven time and time and time and time again, it is a bad idea.

Doesn't matter the motive, it still never happened before we decided to get involved.

I never once said any of it was reasonable. I was just saying it's what you can expect when dealing with people in that part of the World and is it really worth endangering the lives of your own people to support any of the allies in the region who probably couldn't give a damn about you.

It can easily be argued that Canada has suffered more now than we did before.

He also condemned what he said were U.S.-abetted massacres done to Muslim communities from Palestine to Chechnya and the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children who died from lack of food and medicine due to what he called “unjustifiable” U.S.-led sanctions on the country during the 1990s. As well as the deployment throughout the Gulf states of U.S. forces, particularly in Saudi Arabia. I'm not agreeing with anything he said but those are the reasons he stated in his letter.

The thing about Buff is he loves to throw his weight around and will answer the call to a retaliation but he doesn't throw many punches and just kind of wrestles guys to the ground most of the time. I'm convinced Paul Maurice hasn't given him the green light to throw punches in case of injury maybe? Without Buff the intimidation factor on the Jets goes down by a lot. Peluso on the other hand is the Jets best fighter without a doubt and has had 2 or 3 fights with Gazdic, including one in the AHL. If your counting shots their might be a winner but it can really go either way. Probably the two best fighters in the NHL right now.

Even Bin Laden himself declared the exact reasons for the attacks which means even he thought A=B. It's a never ending cycle over there, once you stick your nose in, good luck getting out without enduring suffering. The question you have to ask is was all that mucking about worth it for the US to endure the 9/11 attacks? And are we willing to endure the same thing with our continued and possibly elevated support?